Comments on: Musharraf Agrees to a Change of Clothes

By: Sin

Sin — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 00:56:10 +0000

Every time I hear about this, I shudder at the thought of one of those incompetent, corrupt, self-serving, slimy, thieving assholes coming back into power. I’m going to vote for Imran Khan.

By: sic semper tyrannis

sic semper tyrannis — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 21:24:31 +0000

"to return and context in those elections"

Surely you mean contest

By: chachaji

chachaji — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 02:44:50 +0000

There may have been a change in the law about whether Army chiefs can be President, but the main thing is the need for legitimacy. I think Musharraf himself feels the need for it at a personal level more than Zia ever did. And, mainly from that feeling, he had promised to retire from the Army at the end of 2004, while continuing in his current term as President. Then he 'changed his mind', and continued in both offices. However, while Zia was Army chief, the Pakistan Army had just one 4-star general, Zia himself. Now the Pakistan Army has 3 generals of 4-star rank, including Musharraf and the two Generals Ahsan and Ehsan. The day-to-day Army stuff is handled by these two generals.

So the impetus for Musharraf to retire from the Army comes mainly from the imperative of 'keeping his word'. But don't expect things to change too much just because he retires from the Army, the influence of the Army on Pakistan is very deep, and in some ways, he is only its most visible face.

There is one complication, though. As the Pakistan Constitution currently stands - he can't run for public office within two years of retiring. Yet, somehow, perhaps from what was called the 'Legal Framework Order', a ruling from the Supreme Court allowed him to be President while he was Army Chief. So 'one way out' would be for him to get himself elected President (the propriety of an election whose results are known beforehand seems occasionally lost on the people who suggest this) and then immediately resign as Army Chief, and continue as President.

On a different note - and to correct the impression I left in my earlier comment regarding Aitzaz Ahsan and BB - they appear to be moving apart - he expressed himself on BBC Urdu last night against the idea of any deal with Musharraf, and when BB was asked to react to it today by the same outlet - she said she was making the deal 'for democracy', not for herself, and that she enjoyed the support of her party, while anyone who disagreed was free to go their own way!

By: Aqualung

Aqualung — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 02:23:35 +0000

General Zia-ul-Haq often was seen in full military uniform, even after 1984 referendrum.

So it seems... he never had to give it up. So has the law changed now that they're saying he can't be president and be in uniform? If Zia appeared in uniform, presumably he was still army chief?

By: Kush Tandon

Kush Tandon — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 01:57:24 +0000

I wonder when and under what circumstanbces Zia Ul Haq gave up his uniform? I was a kid in the 80s growing up in India and never recall seeing him in military uniform.

General Zia-ul-Haq often was seen in full military uniform, even after 1984 referendrum.

By: Aqualung

Aqualung — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 01:50:40 +0000

I wonder when and under what circumstanbces Zia Ul Haq gave up his uniform? I was a kid in the 80s growing up in India and never recall seeing him in military uniform. It would be interesting to draw parallels between Zia’s reign and that of and Musharaff’s… Let’s see… Zia had the Soviets, Musharaff has Al Qaeda. Zia hanged Bhutto, Musharaff banished Sharif and Benazir. Zia held a referendum, as did Musharraf.. to legitimize themselves. Zia appointed Junejo as the puppet PM, Musharaff appointed Jamali. I’m sure the constitutional machinations were similar but don’t know enough about these in either era.

By: chachaji

chachaji — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:46:30 +0000

Mian Nawaz Sharif from February 2003 and 'Quaid' Nawaz Sharif today.

By: Amardeep

Amardeep — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:42:43 +0000

Chachaji, you appear to have a case of blame-the-ISI-for-everything-itis. But anyway:

Sharif looks good (literally, with a new toupe).

I thought the same thing. In fact, he looks a little like Al Gore in some of the pictures.

By: chachaji

chachaji — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:25:05 +0000

I think Benazir has damaged herself very badly by being seen to negotiate with Musharraf, and so openly at that. If the NYT can print that the ISI chief Gen Kiyani is himself involved in the negotiations, you can bet her opponents will use it to claim that she is now a complete puppet, and what is more, that will probably be both credible and true. She will also have had Musharraf drop the corruption cases against her, and that will damn her further, perhaps compromise her irretrievably in the eyes of the public. She will be helped, on the other hand, by the fact that Aitzaz Ahsan, who acted as the lawyer for Chief Justice Chaudhry, in the case arising from the 'reference' issue and emerged with enhanced public stature - is in her party, the Pakistan People's Party.

Sharif looks good (literally, with a new toupe) for being seen as having stood up to Mushy. The sad fact is, however, that both he and BB will be controlled by the ISI, if either makes it back. It's all a bit too much, for the country's intelligence agency to literally be kingmaker like this. And whether it's a puppet government by a mafia of feudal barons or a mafia of industrial robber barons - that's the choice Pakistanis will have, while the military and the ISI continue to be the puppet masters.

By: shlok

shlok — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:39:02 +0000

Musharraf realizes that neither Sharif nor Bhutto are likely to beat him in an open election, especially if he pits one against the other and the opposition parties are divided.

i think this is the most right on prediction of all. from me talking to pakistani friends, they love musharraf. but just don't want another fidel wannabe as their leader.

i think musharraf realizes so and,

he stands to gain the stamp of democratic respectability on the world stage